Legal Opinion
State v. Chappell
Ohio Supreme Court
Decided December 15, 2010No. 2009-2131PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
[Cite as State v. Chappell, 127 Ohio St.3d 376,
2010-Ohio-5991.] THE STATE OF OHIO, APPELLANT, v. CHAPPELL, APPELLEE. [Cite as State v. Chappell, 127 Ohio St.3d 376,
2010-Ohio-5991.] Criminal law — Possession of criminal tools — R.C. 2923.24(A) — Meaning of phrase “with purpose to use [substance, device, instrument, or article] criminally” — Purpose to use item criminally can arise from intended violation of federal as well as Ohio law. (No. 2009-2131 — Submitted September 28, 2010 — Decided December 15, 2010.) APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Cuyahoga County, No. 92455,
2009-Ohio-5371.…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- PDK Laboratories Inc. v. United States Drug Enforcement AdministrationCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2004
- State v. HairstonOhio Supreme Court · 2004
- Niskanen v. Giant Eagle, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 2009
- Bailey v. Republic Engineered Steels, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 2001
- Couts v. RoseOhio Supreme Court · 1950
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Weidman v. HildebrandtOhio Supreme Court · 2024